Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America

Autores
Gulizia, Carla; Camilloni, Ines Angela
Año de publicación
2015
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the ability of two sets of global climate models derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Projects Phase 3 (CMIP3) and Phase 5 (CMIP5) to represent the summer, winter, and annual precipitation mean patterns in South America south of the equator and in three particular sub-regions, between years 1960 and 1999. Different metrics (relative bias, spatial correlation, RMSE, and relative errors) were calculated and compared between both projects in order to determine if there has been improvement from CMIP3 to CMIP5 models in the representation of regional rainfall. Results from this analysis indicate that for the analyzed seasons, precipitation simulated by both CMIP3 and CMIP5 models' ensembles exhibited some differences. In DJF the relative bias over Amazonia, central South America, eastern Argentina and Uruguay is reduced in CMIP5 compared to CMIP3. In JJA, the same occurs in some areas of Amazonia. Annual precipitation is also better represented by the CMIP5 than CMIP3 GCMs as they underestimate precipitation to a lesser extent, although in NE Brazil the overestimation values are much larger in CMIP5 than in CMIP3 analysis. In line with previous studies, the multi-model ensembles show the best representation of the observed patterns in most seasons and regions. Only in some cases, single GCMs (MIROC3.2(hires) -CMIP3- and MIROC4h -CMIP5-) presented better results than the ensemble. The high horizontal resolution of these models suggests that this could be a relevant issue for a more adequate estimation of rainfall at least in the analyzed regions.
Fil: Gulizia, Carla. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera; Argentina. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; Francia
Fil: Camilloni, Ines Angela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera; Argentina. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; Francia
Materia
Global Climate Models
Evaluation
Precipitation
South America
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/42037
Acceder
id CONICETDig_10bacc11d2d24d3c7f5ae2ca937ae0a7
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/42037
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South AmericaGulizia, CarlaCamilloni, Ines AngelaGlobal Climate ModelsEvaluationPrecipitationSouth Americahttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.5https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the ability of two sets of global climate models derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Projects Phase 3 (CMIP3) and Phase 5 (CMIP5) to represent the summer, winter, and annual precipitation mean patterns in South America south of the equator and in three particular sub-regions, between years 1960 and 1999. Different metrics (relative bias, spatial correlation, RMSE, and relative errors) were calculated and compared between both projects in order to determine if there has been improvement from CMIP3 to CMIP5 models in the representation of regional rainfall. Results from this analysis indicate that for the analyzed seasons, precipitation simulated by both CMIP3 and CMIP5 models' ensembles exhibited some differences. In DJF the relative bias over Amazonia, central South America, eastern Argentina and Uruguay is reduced in CMIP5 compared to CMIP3. In JJA, the same occurs in some areas of Amazonia. Annual precipitation is also better represented by the CMIP5 than CMIP3 GCMs as they underestimate precipitation to a lesser extent, although in NE Brazil the overestimation values are much larger in CMIP5 than in CMIP3 analysis. In line with previous studies, the multi-model ensembles show the best representation of the observed patterns in most seasons and regions. Only in some cases, single GCMs (MIROC3.2(hires) -CMIP3- and MIROC4h -CMIP5-) presented better results than the ensemble. The high horizontal resolution of these models suggests that this could be a relevant issue for a more adequate estimation of rainfall at least in the analyzed regions.Fil: Gulizia, Carla. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera; Argentina. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; FranciaFil: Camilloni, Ines Angela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera; Argentina. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; FranciaJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd2015-03info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/42037Gulizia, Carla; Camilloni, Ines Angela; Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America; John Wiley & Sons Ltd; International Journal of Climatology; 35; 4; 3-2015; 583-5950899-84181097-0088CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.4005info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1002/joc.4005info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:33:02Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/42037instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:33:03.087CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America
title Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America
spellingShingle Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America
Gulizia, Carla
Global Climate Models
Evaluation
Precipitation
South America
title_short Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America
title_full Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America
title_sort Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Gulizia, Carla
Camilloni, Ines Angela
author Gulizia, Carla
author_facet Gulizia, Carla
Camilloni, Ines Angela
author_role author
author2 Camilloni, Ines Angela
author2_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Global Climate Models
Evaluation
Precipitation
South America
topic Global Climate Models
Evaluation
Precipitation
South America
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.5
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the ability of two sets of global climate models derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Projects Phase 3 (CMIP3) and Phase 5 (CMIP5) to represent the summer, winter, and annual precipitation mean patterns in South America south of the equator and in three particular sub-regions, between years 1960 and 1999. Different metrics (relative bias, spatial correlation, RMSE, and relative errors) were calculated and compared between both projects in order to determine if there has been improvement from CMIP3 to CMIP5 models in the representation of regional rainfall. Results from this analysis indicate that for the analyzed seasons, precipitation simulated by both CMIP3 and CMIP5 models' ensembles exhibited some differences. In DJF the relative bias over Amazonia, central South America, eastern Argentina and Uruguay is reduced in CMIP5 compared to CMIP3. In JJA, the same occurs in some areas of Amazonia. Annual precipitation is also better represented by the CMIP5 than CMIP3 GCMs as they underestimate precipitation to a lesser extent, although in NE Brazil the overestimation values are much larger in CMIP5 than in CMIP3 analysis. In line with previous studies, the multi-model ensembles show the best representation of the observed patterns in most seasons and regions. Only in some cases, single GCMs (MIROC3.2(hires) -CMIP3- and MIROC4h -CMIP5-) presented better results than the ensemble. The high horizontal resolution of these models suggests that this could be a relevant issue for a more adequate estimation of rainfall at least in the analyzed regions.
Fil: Gulizia, Carla. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera; Argentina. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; Francia
Fil: Camilloni, Ines Angela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera; Argentina. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; Francia
description The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the ability of two sets of global climate models derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Projects Phase 3 (CMIP3) and Phase 5 (CMIP5) to represent the summer, winter, and annual precipitation mean patterns in South America south of the equator and in three particular sub-regions, between years 1960 and 1999. Different metrics (relative bias, spatial correlation, RMSE, and relative errors) were calculated and compared between both projects in order to determine if there has been improvement from CMIP3 to CMIP5 models in the representation of regional rainfall. Results from this analysis indicate that for the analyzed seasons, precipitation simulated by both CMIP3 and CMIP5 models' ensembles exhibited some differences. In DJF the relative bias over Amazonia, central South America, eastern Argentina and Uruguay is reduced in CMIP5 compared to CMIP3. In JJA, the same occurs in some areas of Amazonia. Annual precipitation is also better represented by the CMIP5 than CMIP3 GCMs as they underestimate precipitation to a lesser extent, although in NE Brazil the overestimation values are much larger in CMIP5 than in CMIP3 analysis. In line with previous studies, the multi-model ensembles show the best representation of the observed patterns in most seasons and regions. Only in some cases, single GCMs (MIROC3.2(hires) -CMIP3- and MIROC4h -CMIP5-) presented better results than the ensemble. The high horizontal resolution of these models suggests that this could be a relevant issue for a more adequate estimation of rainfall at least in the analyzed regions.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-03
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/42037
Gulizia, Carla; Camilloni, Ines Angela; Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America; John Wiley & Sons Ltd; International Journal of Climatology; 35; 4; 3-2015; 583-595
0899-8418
1097-0088
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/42037
identifier_str_mv Gulizia, Carla; Camilloni, Ines Angela; Comparative analysis of the ability of a set of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models to represent precipitation in South America; John Wiley & Sons Ltd; International Journal of Climatology; 35; 4; 3-2015; 583-595
0899-8418
1097-0088
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.4005
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1002/joc.4005
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv John Wiley & Sons Ltd
publisher.none.fl_str_mv John Wiley & Sons Ltd
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844613012286078976
score 13.069144

Publicaciones similares